We Need More Than Speeches

By Fidel "Butch" Montoya

The debate over comprehensive immigration reform has continued to heat up throughout this summer ever since the governor of Arizona signed the Ill-conceived SB 1070 into law.  The law allows for racial and ethnic profiling as a way to arrest, detain, and deport undocumented immigrants in Arizona.  The controversial law has several lawsuits pending against the State of Arizona, including the United States Department of Justice preparing to file suit against Arizona as well.

The proponents of immigration reform have pressured the President and top White House advisors to move forward with a progressive plan to fix our broken immigration system of laws.  There have been marches and rallies in D.C., fasts in New York City, Chicago, and other cities, civil disobedience in Denver and countless cities across the USA, and thousands of petitions and letters demanding that President Obama push the agenda of comprehensive immigration reform forward.

The opponents of immigration reform have rallied around SB 1070, threatening to introduce similar laws in the legislative sessions in at least 12 other states.  The hate, panic, and fear continue to spread as rumors and lies about undocumented immigrants are fed by the Internet groups bent on creating an atmosphere of hate and fear.  

To counter the ridiculous claims of the governor of Arizona that most undocumented immigrants crossing the border are “drug mules,” just shows how important it is to press for the truth and not the lies of the hate mongers and those who spew out evil venom of hate, panic, and lies.

There is no end in sight of the hate mongers and racists who continue to spread their lies and false rumors.  In his speech the President admitted the lack of political will to push for immigration reform. “So the politics of who is and who is not allowed to enter this country, and on what terms, has always been contentious.  And that remains true today.  And it’s made worse by a failure of those of us in Washington to fix a broken immigration system.”

When word leaked out of the White House that the President was going to give a “major speech” on immigration reform, hopes were raised, and there were new expectations of a fresh strategic legislative effort to push both parties into coming together to resolve this national disgrace of a broken immigration system. 

The stage was set at American University in D.C. for the President to finally address the nation and call for a new legislative agenda to implement a new system of immigration laws that would do away with a system of grave injustice, family separations, ICE raids, and a confusing array of law enforcement MOU’s like 287 (g) that have only allowed local cops to use racial profiling as a means of stopping and detaining undocumented immigrants. 

The primary reason police can stop Latino looking individuals are joint law enforcement programs like 287 (g) which allow racial profiling.  Police have used broken tail lights, suspicious looking drivers or passengers, and driving while breathing “brown” to pull over Latinos on our nation’s highways.

While the President has tried to shame the Republicans into supporting immigration reform, the reality is that there are perhaps as many Democrats who are afraid to push for immigration reform in a mid-term election environment filled with rumors, lies, and hate messages about undocumented immigrants. 

The President said, “In sum, the system is broken.  And everybody knows it.  Unfortunately, reform has been held hostage to political posturing and special-interest wrangling -– and to the pervasive sentiment in Washington that tackling such a thorny and emotional issue is inherently bad politics.”   

Presente.org – a national pro-immigrant civil rights organization pushing for comprehensive immigration reform criticized the President by saying, “We need more than speeches.” 

That seemed to be the general consensus from other Latino civil rights organizations across the country.  What good is another Presidential speech that does nothing but cast blame on the Republicans and whose own Democratic members continue to waffle on getting out front of this debate and who blatantly refuse to support the President’s own legislative agenda on immigration reform?     

Polls seem to indicate that most Americans want the President and Congress to do something about fixing our dysfunctional immigration laws that do more harm than good.  If one believes that more than a majority of Americans want something done, then where are the courageous leaders and advocates for justice and righteousness?

Until the President is able to put together a bipartisan group of Congressional leaders who are willing to work together to draw up a comprehensive immigration plan that addresses the immediate needs of over 11 million undocumented immigrants in our country, nothing will get done.

Much has been said and debated over the “pathway to citizenship” for the undocumented immigrants who seek citizenship.  But on the other hand, not all undocumented immigrants want citizenship, but rather a work visa that allows them to cross the border when there is work to be done and then be able to return home.  This visa needs to provide the undocumented or visa permitted workers the right to make a fair wage, expect worker protections, and have the ability to organize if necessary in order to protect their rights as temporary workers in the USA. 

Some critics of the past worker programs have claimed that the border has been left open just enough to allow cheap labor to cross the border.   The days of cheap labor are over, along with abusive employers who have taken advantage of undocumented immigrant workers in the past. 

But the sad part of the Presidential speech is that he was essentially speaking to the choir. Everyone knows we need comprehensive immigration reform.  We know the present system is broken and must be fixed. 

The President laid out the challenge facing Congress.  “Our task then is to make our national laws actually work -– to shape a system that reflects our values as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants.  And that means being honest about the problem, and getting past the false debates that divide the country rather than bring it together.”

While the President calls for a more secure border, he insisted the border is the most secure than anytime in the past twenty years.  Yet the President admitted that, “Our borders will not be secure as long as our limited resources are devoted to not only stopping gangs and potential terrorists, but also the hundreds of thousands who attempt to cross each year simply to find work.”

Unfortunately we know ICE and the Obama Administration are detaining and deporting more innocent undocumented immigrants than the Bush Administration, and the President has failed to live up to his stated goals of prioritizing criminals and stopping gangs and potential terrorists.

The drug cartels and the large shipments of drugs over the border must have a higher priority than the family that is simply looking for work in the USA.

So the President gave a speech, more likely to appease his supporters.  Some pundits have claimed the President hoped the speech would motivate and challenge the Latino voter to get out and support candidates that support his policies.  It was an attempt to try and make up for his failure to prioritize immigration reform in his first year and to fire up his supporters to get out and vote.

The President gave a campaign speech, with more promises on why immigration reform is important.  In fact, it is more important today than ever before.  Instead of giving a Presidential speech with an action plan, he said nothing about ending the ICE raids, and putting a stop to the 287 (g) local enforcement programs abused by local cops that allows racial profiling and ethnic enforcement. 

We don’t need anymore speeches on why immigration reform is needed now more than ever.  It is time the President acted like the President and put a stop to the grave injustice and unrighteousness undocumented families face every day in this country.

Yes, Mr. President, we are a land of immigrants.  Together our forefathers built this country and the infrastructure that created jobs and a better life for all who sought a job and an opportunity.  Yet, along the way we have had to fight the bigots, the racists, the haters, and those whose only intent was to spew out racial hatred and push immigrants down. 

Mr. President, we hoped you would have stood up to those ugly voices of fear, panic and hate.  We wished you would have used your Executive Power to put an end to misdirected immigration enforcement programs that are only separating families and deporting good hard working men and women. 

If you really want to put an end to the drug cartels, the shipments of drugs and millions of dollars across the border, an end to the weapons we are selling to the drug cartels, then you should have declared war to end the drug cartels that continue to meet the drug demands of those Americans who live not only in the barrios, but the high priced skyscraper apartments of every city in the USA. 

Mr. President, we don’t need any more speeches.  We need a bipartisan plan of attack against the drug and human traffickers.  We need you to quiet the voices of hate and panic and move this debate from the gutter to the halls of Congress.  Mr. President, be Presidential and do what you can do to end the injustice these families must endure every day.

No one said the job of being President would be easy, but it will take a President with hope and a vision to develop an agenda that both Republicans and Democrats can accept and work together to fix our broken immigration system.

Mr. President, thank you for recommitting your administration to fighting for immigration reform, but that is not good enough.  Now it is time to move beyond just words, and take bold action to fix this problem which Lady Liberty reminds the world as a national disgrace.

 If you can take a courageous and bold effort to lead the battle to repair the broken immigration system, be assured that many Americans will be  behind you fighting the injustice and national disgrace of an immigration system that has spiraled out of control.  

Lead and we will follow your leadership.  Exemplify your courage to bring down the haters and end the venom of fear, and we will stand with you.

You gave an inspirational speech at American University, now it is time for bold and courageous leadership.  Can you make your speech a national priority and prove that you are indeed our senior ally?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fidel "Butch" Montoya is Director of H. S. Power and Light Ministries - Latino Faith Initiative. He was the Vice President/News Director of KUSA - TV Channel 9 News from 1985-1990, and worked at the news station for 24 years. Montoya also served as Deputy Mayor of City and County of Denver from 1995-1999; as the Manager of Public Safety for the City and County of Denver from 1994-2000. Montoya was Licensed to preach in 1972. He serves on the Executive Council for the Hispanic Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Arizona's new immigration law rebutted

Ruben Navarrette Jr.

Monday, June 7, 2010

If Arizona's new immigration law is supposed to be the best thing since warm tortillas, why do supporters have to prop it up by engaging in falsehoods and scare tactics? Let me count the ways:

The law bans racial profiling. Truth: Racial profiling is already banned by federal statute, yet it happens. The Arizona law requires that once local and state police make contact with someone over an alleged infraction, they must determine legal status if they have "reasonable suspicion" that the person is in the country illegally. It is naive to assume an officer can make that call without taking race into account.

Arizona is being invaded. The law is a cry for help. Truth: No, it's a claim to victimhood. Our society is full of people who duck responsibility for their actions by playing the victim. Now states are doing it. Arizona has illegal immigrants because Arizonans hire them. Take away the "help wanted" sign, and they won't come.

The federal government is doing nothing to stop illegal immigration. Truth: The Obama administration deported more illegal immigrants last year than the Bush administration did in its final year in office. There are 20,000 Border Patrol agents, more than any other federal law enforcement agency. The Border Patrol budget was $3 billion last year, and it has increased almost tenfold since 1992. Not exactly an "open border" policy.

The scope and intent of the law have always been clear. Truth: Supporters like to forget that there have been two versions of the law. The first was defective and had to be fixed one week after it was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer.

The Arizona law is no different than laws in other states, such as California, that require police to 'cooperate' with Border Patrol officers and allow them to inquire as to citizenship. Truth: (1) Cooperating with the Border Patrol isn't the same as impersonating Border Patrol agents; (2) California Penal Code 834b pertains to "any person who is arrested." That's the key difference. In Arizona, you need not be under arrest to be interrogated.

The Arizona law is a carbon copy of federal law. So, it can't be unconstitutional. Truth: The problem is how the law will be implemented. Under existing federal statutes, immigrants may have their citizenship questioned but only by federal agents. Under the Arizona law, that power is extended to local police. Many legal scholars believe this to be clearly unconstitutional because immigration policy is a federal responsibility and not something that can be done piecemeal by individual states.

The presence of immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, in a given town, city, county or state inevitably leads to more crime, i.e., burglary, assault, drunk driving, rape, murder, etc. Truth: For a variety of reasons, as the immigrant population increases, crime rates go down. For one thing, immigrants aren't as bold and defiant as people think. Various researchers who studied the rise in immigration during the 1990s concluded that cities with increased numbers of immigrants had the most significant drops in crime rates.

Americans show identification to cash checks, board planes, drive cars, etc. This is no different. Truth: In such transactions, we're asking for a privilege or a benefit and we willingly identify ourselves to get it. It's a quid pro quo. In Arizona, where you can be grilled for attending a house party with loud music or being a passenger in a vehicle, the "privilege" Latinos are asking for is simply to breathe. This shouldn't come at a price.

Latinos won't be racially profiled. But if they were, it would be justified given that most illegal immigrants come from Mexico and the rest of Latin America. Truth: Supporters can't have it both ways, insisting that a practice won't occur while justifying it as logical and thus likely to occur.

This law makes Arizonans safer. Truth: Quite the opposite. By sending illegal immigrants underground, Arizona has created a pool of ready-made victims who can be preyed upon at will because they won't report crimes to police. Scoundrels, thieves and predators will pounce.

If supporters of the Arizona law truly believe in this legislation, they should ditch their list of disingenuous talking points and start speaking honestly. It would do wonders for their credibility - not to mention the credibility of the dubious law they support.

San Diego Union-Tribune

To comment, e-mail Ruben Navarrette Jr. at ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/06/07/EDDN1DPG7P.DTL

More About the Numbers....

by Fidel "Butch" Montoya

Thousands of marchers came from across the USA to march on May 29th in Phoenix, Arizona. It was pegged as one of the largest marches in the history of Phoenix as tens of thousands braved the dry hot conditions to march against injustice and racism. Viewing video from several news media sources, it was clear this was a mega march against SB 1070, supported by 100,000 marchers.

Pastor Eve Nunez, a Latina Evangelical pastor from Phoenix told me that she has marched from the early days with Cesar Chavez, and this was the biggest march she has seen in Phoenix. This is coming from someone who has committed her ministry to seeking justice and fighting unjust laws.

Pastor Nunez told me, “I have been in every Marcha since the 70s with Cesar. I asked police officers present (about the number of marchers), they said at least One Hundred Thousand. The Organizer Salvador Reza from Puente told me he believes there was more. This was the most Hispanic Clergy,” present in a march in Phoenix.

Yet if you read news accounts of the march, some news outlets estimated the crowd at 10,000. Others simply said, “Thousands marched against SB 1070.” The Los Angeles Times did try to estimate the crowd, one of the few to do so, but still did not give a figure. “Under a broiling desert sun, tens of thousands of protesters on Saturday slowly marched five miles to the state Capitol to rally against Arizona's controversial new immigration law. There was no official crowd estimate, but the march was by far the biggest demonstration since Gov. Jan Brewer signed SB 1070 into law on April 23.”

Reading the New York Times, the reporter appeared to try and present “a balanced approach” to the story. “Two sides of the immigration debate converged here Saturday: a throng of several thousand marching for five miles opposed to Arizona’s new immigration law, and several thousand nearly filling a nearby stadium in the evening in support of it.”

Why is the news media attempting to down play the number of over 100,000 people who marched on May 29th in Phoenix? It seems very odd to me that the news media went out of it way to discount the tens of thousands who marched for several miles to the State Capitol building. 

Without a doubt, the news media can influence the outcome of a major mega march like the one in Phoenix. Readers and viewers who depend on these news outlets for news and information also expect for the reporters on the scene to be accurate and truthful, not just giving their opinions of what they believe actually happened. When reporters fail to accurately report the facts of a major march like the one in Phoenix, the credibility of these reporters becomes suspect.

Pastor Nunez felt strongly that it was the largest march she has seen in Phoenix and seemed perplexed by the low estimate by the news media. Aerial video of the march on CNN clearly showed that tens of thousands of people participated in the march. From viewing the video, it was clear to me that more than 10,000 people were marching. Even several police officers present at the march told Pastor Nunez that it appeared that there were 100,000 marchers on the streets of Phoenix. 

Julie Gonzales, one of Colorado’s best organizers for immigration reform did attend the march in Phoenix. I asked her what she thought about the number of people who marched the 5.7 miles in the heat. “Yes, it was absolutely over 10.000. I was about 15 blocks away from my friend who was much closer to the front of the march, and I then turned around and I still couldn't see the end of the march. And we're talking both sidewalks full of people. It wasn't just people in the street, or on one lane. It was building to building full of people.” 

Gonzales did admit that she could not estimate the crowd, but did say, “I can't really speak to whether it was 50 or 100 or 200 thousand. All I know is that it was massive.” But she also made it clear that it was far more than the 10,000 reported by some news media outlets.

The New York Daily News reported, “Thousands of civil rights and labor activists from across the United States – carrying banners that read:  “Obama Keep Your Promise” – rallied in Phoenix to protest the law, which requires state and local police to investigate the immigration status of people they suspect are in the country illegally.” Again, the newspaper reporter made no attempt to estimate the crowd, just the word, "Thousands.”

Pablo Alvarado of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, one of the primary organizers of the mega march on May 29th, in an email to supporters of the march wrote, “This weekend 100,000 people marched six miles from Steele Indian School Park to the State Capitol to denounce SB 1070 and demand President Obama intervene in the growing human rights crisis of Arizona.”

It is unfortunate that the news media reporting on the march did not report on the actual number of people who came from across the country to protest a law that has created what Alvarado calls, “the growing human rights crisis of Arizona.” 

Let me be very clear about one issue. It is not just about the number of people who marched, but about the number of people who came out on a very hot day to demand that SB 1070 be reversed and taken off the books as a hateful and illegal profiling law.

The fact that 100,000 people came together in the streets of Phoenix should serve notice that many thousands of people are opposed to this law. The accurate reporting on the events of the day should reflect the fact that thousands of people, 100,000 of them, were willing to travel to Phoenix and march demanding that President Obama intervene in this issue and challenge the law in the courts. 

It is time that the news media report accurately the fact the “civil rights movement of the 21st century” is a real a movement and it is only beginning to grow. Pastor Nunez mentioned that this was the first time that many members of the Hispanic clergy marched along the throngs of marchers demanding justice and righteousness. 

Under the leadership of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, more and more Latino faith leaders are voicing their opposition to the immoral and illegal law that allows police officers to profile any “brown person” whom they “reasonably suspect” might be an undocumented immigrant in the country illegally.

Already, many “brown” American citizens are being detained and put in detention facilities because police officers are not trained properly to determine who is illegal and who just because of their “Latino features” are immediately suspected as being illegal.

This is what brought over 100,000 to the streets of Phoenix on May 29th. This is what is causing the Latino clergy to understand that a prophetic and voice of spiritual leadership is needed today just as the Dr. Martin Luther King brought to the early civil rights movement. More and more national Latino spiritual faith leaders are demanding that we stand together in the face of hate and discrimination that has sprouted an ugly racist movement against Latinos.

In the future, one would trust that the news media would do a better job reporting on the nature of the event, highlighting the fact that the largest march against SB 1070 took place with over 100,000 marchers demanding justice and due process. The May 29th march was not just another march or civic expression of frustration and fear.

This is just the beginning of a new civil rights movement, one that is partnering with Black leaders who marched during past civil rights demonstrations demanding justice and equality. 

Together, we will bring Arizona to its knees, either by showing that a national boycott will cause unprecedented financial ramifications to the state economy, or to its knees asking forgiveness for being so open with their hate and bigotry toward Latinos.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fidel "Butch" Montoya is Director of H. S. Power and Light Ministries - Latino Faith Initiative. He was the Vice President/News Director of KUSA - TV Channel 9 News from 1985-1990, and worked at the news station for 24 years. Montoya also served as Deputy Mayor of City and County of Denver from 1995-1999; as the Manager of Public Safety for the City and County of Denver from 1994-2000. Montoya was Licensed to preach in 1972. He serves on the Executive Council for the Hispanic Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anti-Immigrant Group Recommends Economic Self-Destruction for Arizona

For Immediate Release

May 18, 2010

Washington D.C. - In data released "exclusively to FoxNews.com," the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) - architects of the new Arizona law SB1070 - claim that unauthorized immigrants in Arizona are costing the state's taxpayers $2.7 billion per year for education, medical care, and incarceration. The release of this "fiscal analysis" takes advantage of the absence of any legitimate economic analysis by the state on what SB1070 will cost. However, judging from FAIR's track record when it comes to these kinds of state estimates, it is likely that their numbers are virtually meaningless. In its most recent state studies on unauthorized immigration in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, for instance, FAIR has dramatically exaggerated the fiscal "costs" imposed by unauthorized immigrants by including schooling and medical care for their native-born, U.S.-citizen children in its estimate, and conveniently forgetting to account for the economic role that unauthorized workers play as consumers who help support local economies.

FAIR's latest data fails to account for the property, sales, and income taxes paid by unauthorized immigrants. Nor does the data account for the consumer purchasing power of unauthorized immigrants - what they spend on goods, services, and housing - which actually creates jobs and generates additional tax revenue. They seem to forget that deporting workers also means deporting consumers and taxpayers.

However, in all fairness, they do acknowledge that the costs of implementing SB1070 will add to the economic strain on the state. In the absence of any state-generated fiscal data on the cost of the law's implementation, some Arizonans have pointed to a fact sheet produced by Yuma County Sheriff Ralph E. Ogden in response to similar legislation proposed in 2006. The Yuma county snapshot of enforcement costs is a sobering reminder of the overwhelming financial costs - up to $100 million for just one Arizona county - that will ensue if the state attempts to enforce its new law. Ultimately, this law will cost Arizona hundreds of millions of dollars to implement. Yet those costs are only part of the story and don't even account for lost revenue from losing a part of the workforce, not to mention a growing boycott and expensive lawsuits from which the state will have to defend itself.

For further information see:

• Implementation Costs of SB1070 to One Arizona County (IPC Press Release, April 23, 2010)

• How Much Will Arizona's Immigration Bill SB1070 Cost? (IPC Press Release (April 21, 2010)

• Arizona is Not the First State to Take Immigration Matters into their Own Hands (IPC Fact Check, May 6, 2010)

###

For more information contact Wendy Sefsaf at wsefsaf@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7524.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

A division of the American Immigration Council. Visit our website at http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/.

Say what you will, SB 1070 is still profiling.

By Fidel “Butch” Montoya

The Arizona Legislature after running into harsh criticism and condemnation of SB 1070 as the worst racial and ethnic profiling law in the land, took some feeble steps to change the intent of the law by trying to ensure that law enforcement officers didn’t abuse their authority by stopping and questioning every person who fit the profile of an “undocumented immigrant,” by amending the law with HB 2165.

Governor Jan Brewer signed the bill passed by the Arizona Legislature that now requires every alien present in the state to carry proper documentation that they are legally in the state. The police can use “reasonable suspicion” to question any suspected undocumented immigrant in the state about their legal status. If undocumented immigrants do not carry “their papers,” police can charge them with additional fines, and in effect, making innocent men, or women – criminals.

The whole issue of racial profiling and ethnic intimidation allowing police to question anyone, who fits a profile of an undocumented immigrant, has raised a new issue of defining what an undocumented immigrant looks like. Even Governor Brewer who claims that police will undergo new training in identifying what a undocumented immigrant looks like, could not even venture a response to a question from a reporter what that training will entail.

But like all politicians, she couldn’t pass the chance to give a vague response. "I do not know," she said. "I do not know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I can tell you that I think that there are people in Arizona who assume they know what an illegal immigrant looks like. I don't know if they know that for a fact or not."

Mike Littwin, columnist of The Denver Post, wrote the best response to the question. She said that they're still trying to come up with guidelines for the law. We all know what the law will do — go after those with the wrong accents or the wrong shoes or who press 2 at the ATM.

The bottom line, civil rights organizations are already lining up to sue the state and demand that the racial profiling law be reviewed by the courts. The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the ACLU of Arizona filed their challenge against Arizona’s Latino racial profiling law last week.

In a major show of support and unity with the Latino community, the NAACP, the nations’ oldest and respected civil rights organization in the country called SB 1070 an attempt to roll back the clock on civil rights protections in our country. The NAACP is outraged that Arizona would pass a law that empowers the police to legally use racial profiling as a means by which to target the Latino community.

The Black community lead the civil rights movement back in the 1950’s, suffering the indignity and injustice of police abuse and brutality during non-violent civil disobedience protests, know what racial profiling can lead to when police abuse the authority given them under the law.

They also understand how the moral disregard of the law can be abused when segregationist Public Safety manager of Birmingham used his police against non-violent protestors in Birmingham. Theophilus Eugene “Bull” Connor was responsible for the ugliest images embedded in our minds of cops and dogs brutally attacking innocent victims of the civil rights demonstrations. Dr. Martin Luther King called, “Birmingham the most segregated city in America.” It was here that America watched in horror on television as police used police dogs to drag away protestors in the streets of Birmingham. But one of the most dreadful images caught by news photojournalists of the time were the high powered water fire hoses used to push and wash Black protestors off their feet and into submission. Speaking from a sense of history and outrage, NAACP Chairman Roslyn M. Brock condemned the fact that SB 1070 was a violation of the moral and human rights standard in our country and an attempt to roll back the clock.

“The passage of SB1070 is an embarrassment to the equal protection clause in the U.S. Constitution, and if we are not careful will leave a permanent stain on the United States’ reputation throughout the world. As an association that has fought for more than 100 years to ensure that basic rights and freedoms would be equally extended to all, it is disheartening to see the State of Arizona enact a law that tramples on the civil rights of Hispanic persons, and one that cannot be enforced without resorting to racial and ethnic profiling. We intend to use the full weight of our 2200 branches and units to ensure that this law is repealed and does not happen in other states across this nation.”

In Colorado, a highly respected civil rights lawyer took the time to analyze SB 1070 and the feeble attempt by the Arizona Legislature to amend the law (HB 2162) in their efforts to quiet claims that by allowing police to use “reasonable suspicion,” basically meant racial and ethnic profiling was legal in Arizona. Joseph Salazar, who “read and dissected SB 1070,’ even after the legislature passed HB 2165, wrote, “HB 1070 is severely flawed. There are no real safeguards prohibiting unconstitutional conduct, such as racial profiling.” Salazar opined, “The fact is that SB 1070 violates the scared principles of our federal government’s power to regulate immigration.”

Salazar took the task upon himself to read and analyze SB 1070 after Scott McInnis, Republican running for governor of Colorado, claimed that even though he had not read or studied SB 1070, he would sign such a bill if he were Governor of Colorado. The same gentlemen who while in Congress warned the nation right after the 911 terrorist attacks on our country, “the need for profiling for the national security of this country."

David Sirota, columnist for a syndicated column in Oregon Live. Com wrote, “Brandishing his past experience as a police officer, he implored lawmakers "to quit being politically correct" and let authorities make "ethnic background a legitimate component" of law enforcement investigations -- just as Arizona's new statute allows.

“Insurance companies profile for risk. That is what I am asking that we continue to do -- we need to profile for risk," he thundered, adding that using ethnicity as a risk factor "is very legitimate -- I think it is smart.”

Commenting further, Sirota wrote, In other words, we should do to civil rights what insurance firms have done to, say, health care -- namely, deny people rights and privileges based on their ascribed characteristics.

No wonder, McInnis didn’t need to read SB 1070 and stand before he stood before the microphones and proudly stated he would readily agree to sign it into law if he were elected Governor of Colorado. It is part of his DNA as a former cop to understand how easily it is to make “ethnic background a legitimate component” for profiling people who look like the bad guys.

With McInnis’s lack of political astuteness and understanding that SB 1070 is morally reprehensible to a large group of voters in Colorado, he allowed his own personal feelings about racial and ethnic “profiling for risk” to blurt out without understanding the political repercussions of being so frank and in this case, dishonest.

So while civil right lawyer Salazar took the time to read and analyze the law, it was very easy to see that the intent of the Arizona law – as written in the law itself, “The legislature declares that the intent of this act is to make attrition through enforcement the public policy of all state and local governmental agencies in Arizona.”

For McInnis and others who champion the violation of civil rights under the guise of protecting our country by using racial and ethnic profiling might want to take the same amount of time and effort as Salazar and find out for themselves that, “HB 1070 is severely flawed. There are no real safeguards prohibiting unconstitutional conduct, such as racial profiling.” Salazar opined, “The fact is that SB 1070 violates the scared principles of our federal government’s power to regulate immigration.”

No matter how much the Arizona Legislature tried to hide the true intent of SB 1070 by amending the law with HB 2165, putting lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.

Fidel "Butch" Montoya is Director of H.S. Power and Light Ministries. He was the Vice President/News Director of KUSA Channel 9 News from 1985-1990, and worked at the news station for 24 years. Montoya also served as Deputy Mayor of City and County of Denver from 1995-1999; as the Manager of Public Safety for the City and County of Denver from 1994-2000. Montoya was Licensed to preach in 1972. He serves on the Executive Council for the Hispanic Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

Church leaders call for 'compassionate' solution to illegal immigration

by CYNTHIA VEGA
WFAA
Posted on April 30, 2010 at 1:19 PM
Updated today at 5:57 PM

DALLAS - A group of evangelical church leaders held an early morning prayer vigil Friday, in advance of Saturday's big immigration march in downtown Dallas.

They say it's their moral duty to help find a way to resolve illegal immigration, in a more compassionate way than the legislation passed in Arizona.

They said not all religious conservatives take a hard line on illegal immigration.

Unlike in the past, this year's Mega March through downtown Dallas has created a deep divide between those in favor and those against new legislation in Arizona, which allows police to stop and question those seeming to be illegal immigrants.

It has a group of North Texas faith leaders, already deep in thought and prayer, seeing how this legislation is already affecting their church communities.

"We are seeing, for instance, churches that have lost up to 50 families because of the fear factor of SB1070," said Mark Gonzales, a pastor.

Gonzales, like others in the group, sees the urgency of addressing illegal immigration but believes federal leaders in Washington should be taking action, not individual states.

"We understand the Arizona situation, and what's going on across the border, but we don't believe SB1070 is a way to go about trying to secure the border," he added.

Most immediately, this group is praying people will march peacefully tomorrow, no matter what their stand.

Included in their prayer circle on Friday, was newly-appointed Dallas Police Chief David Brown, who is ready to do his part.

"We've got pretty good plans in place, comparable with where we are. Of course, we're going to remain flexible and try to get ahead of any problems that might flare," Brown said.

E-mail: cvega@wfaa.com

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Church-leaders-call-for-compassionate-solution-to-illegal-immigration-92524709.html

Texas Gov: Arizona Immigration Law 'Not Right' for Texas

April 29, 2010; Associated Press


Gov. Rick Perry said in a statement: "I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas."

AUSTIN, Texas -- Arizona's tough new illegal immigration enforcement law would not be right for Texas, Gov. Rick Perry said Thursday, upholding the state's long-held tradition of rejecting harsh anti-immigrant policies.

The Arizona law will require local and state law enforcement officers to question people about their immigration status if there's reason to suspect they're in the country illegally, making it a crime for them to lack registration documents. The law also makes it a state crime to be in the U.S. illegally.

"I fully recognize and support a state's right and obligation to protect its citizens, but I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas," Perry said in a written statement.

"For example, some aspects of the law turn law enforcement officers into immigration officials by requiring them to determine immigration status during any lawful contact with a suspected alien, taking them away from their existing law enforcement duties, which are critical to keeping citizens safe."

The Arizona law has been hailed by conservatives as long overdue and two Texas lawmakers have said they'll introduce similar immigration measures when the Texas Legislature meets next.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told a U.S. Senate hearing Tuesday that a Justice Department review is under way to determine the Arizona law's constitutionality.

Though Texas is ruled by conservative Republicans, top GOP leaders from former Texas Gov. George W. Bush to Perry have rejected harsh and punitive immigration policies.

Bush continued his moderate approach to immigration once he got to the White House, often to the dismay of his conservative base.

"We need to uphold the great tradition of the melting pot that welcomes and assimilates new arrivals," Bush said in his 2007 State of the Union address. "We need to resolve the status of the immigrants that are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty."

Perry took heat during this year's Republican primary for backing in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, saying in a debate that the students are on a path to citizenship.

"Texas has a rich history with Mexico, our largest trading partner, and we share more than 1,200 miles of border, more than any other state," Perry said Thursday. "As the debate on immigration reform intensifies, the focus must remain on border security and the federal government's failure to adequately protect our borders.

"Securing our border is a federal responsibility, but it is a Texas problem, and it must be addressed before comprehensive immigration reform is discussed."

Why don't they come legally? They can't

The Oppenheimer Report
BY ANDRES OPPENHEIMER

aoppenheimer@MiamiHerald.com

PHOENIX - APRIL 28: Undocumented Mexican immigrants are in-processed at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), center on April 28, 2010 in Phoenix, Arizona. Across Arizona, city police and county sheriffs' departments turn over detained immigrants to ICE, which deports them to their home countries. Last year ICE deported some 81,000 illegal immigrants from the state of Arizona alone, and with the passage of the state's new tough immigration enforcement law, the number of deportations could rise significantly. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images) After my last column criticizing Arizona's xenophobic immigration law, I got an avalanche of readers' comments. Most of them were angry anti-immigrant tirades, but some made important points that deserve an answer.

I won't waste your time responding to those that reek of racial prejudice. Instead, I will try to respond to some of the most common criticisms made by intelligent, well-meaning people whose arguments can't be dismissed as coming from the lunatic fringe.

Denise, who describes herself as a ``white Anglo who has lived in Miami all my life'' and wonders ``how much longer I will be able to live in the town I grew up in,'' writes: ``I am already a minority who is discriminated against and often feel that I live in a foreign country because of the huge population of Latins who insist on speaking Spanish.''

``My question to you is, Why is it so awful for the citizens of the United States to simply ask immigrants who wish to live in America to do so legally? And why should we reward those who broke the law and came here illegally?'' she asks. ``Maybe in your next article you can address these questions.''

MAJOR REASONS

Well, Denise, let me try. There are four major reasons why I take issue with the premise behind your questions.

First, there would be nothing wrong with demanding that immigrants come to the United States legally if we allowed them to do so. But we don't -- they are coming through the back door to take jobs we offer them, because we don't allow them in through the front door. Legal immigration quotas were set more than 20 years ago, when the U.S. demand for unskilled and highly skilled workers was much smaller than today's.

The U.S. labor market demands up to 500,000 low-skilled workers a year, while the current U.S. immigration system allows for only 5,000 permanent visas for that category, according to the National Immigration Forum, a pro-immigration reform advocacy group.

``There is no real line for unskilled workers,'' says Maurice Belanger, the Forum's public information director. ``If you are a Mexican wanting to get a legal visa to work as a waiter in the United States, you would be dead before you get your visa.''

It's somewhat easier to immigrate legally if you have close family members who are U.S. citizens, but often not by much. According to the latest U.S. State Department's visa bulletin, there is a lengthy backlog in several family visa application categories.

The U.S. government is now processing 1992 applications of Mexican adult children of U.S. citizens, and 1987 applications of Filipino brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.

``Many people think we have good laws and bad people who are breaking them,'' says Frank Sharry, head of America's Voice, a pro-immigration reform advocacy group. ``But we have bad laws and mostly good people who have no line to get into legally.''

EXPENSIVE

Second, deporting up to 10 million undocumented residents would be incredibly costly and impossible to carry out unless we turn this country into a police state. For national security and law enforcement reasons, it would be much better to know who they are, where they live, and to subject them to a series of steps -- learning English and paying taxes among them -- to regularize their status.

Third, I don't like to use the word `illegals' as a noun, because it's aimed at dehumanizing what for the most part are good, hard-working people. Yes, they broke the rules. But U.S. citizens who drive through a red light also break the rules -- in fact, causing much more potential harm -- and that shouldn't turn them into ``illegal'' human beings.

Fourth, I don't think you should be overly alarmed by the fact that many Hispanic immigrants don't speak English. They may not, but their children will. And if their children end up being bilingual, so much the better. In an increasingly competitive global economy, the United States badly needs more bilingual people.

In conclusion, Denise, we have a dysfunctional immigration system. Employers are hiring undocumented immigrants to do jobs Americans won't do, while the U.S. government provides these immigrants with no realistic chance to get legal visas. Perhaps you and I will agree that it's a perverse system that needs comprehensive reform.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2010 Miami Herald Media Company. All Rights Reserved

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/04/29/v-print/1603473/why-dont-they-come-legally-they.html#ixzz0mdEK7Usm

Arizona's Punishing Law Doesn't Fit the Crime

For Immediate Release

April 28, 2010

Arizona's Punishing Law Doesn't Fit the Crime

Studies Show Decrease in Arizona Crime Rates Over Time

Washington, D.C. - Supporters of Arizona's harsh new immigration law claim that it is, in part, a crime-fighting measure. However, people like Republican State Senator Russell Pearce of Mesa, the bill's author, overlook two salient points: crime rates have already been falling in Arizona for years despite the presence of unauthorized immigrants, and a century's worth of research has demonstrated that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes or be behind bars than the native-born. Furthermore, while much has been made about kidnappings in Arizona, law-enforcement officials indicate that most of these involve drug and human smugglers, as well as smuggled immigrants themselves - not the general population of the state.

The Immigration Policy Center releases a fact sheet which shows the decrease in Arizona crime rates over time. The fact sheet also indicates that states with high immigration have the lowest crime rates and that unauthorized immigration is not associated with higher crime rates.

Highlights include:

According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, violent crimes in Arizona fell from 512 per 100,000 people in 2005 to 447 per 100,000 people in 2008, the last year for which data is available.

According to a 2008 report from the conservative Americas Majority Foundation, crime rates are lowest in states with the highest immigration growth rates, such as Arizona. From 1999 to 2006, the total crime rate declined 13.6 percent in the 19 highest-immigration states (including Arizona), compared to a 7.1 percent decline in the other 32 states.

Although the unauthorized immigrant population doubled to about 12 million from 1994 to 2004, data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics indicates that the violent crime rate in the United States declined by 35.1 percent during this time and the property crime rate fell by 25.0 percent.

Combating crime related to human smuggling requires more trust between immigrants and the police, not less. Yet the undermining of trust between police and the community is precisely what Arizona's new law accomplishes. In the final analysis, immigration policy is not an effective means of addressing crime because the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals.

To read the fact check in its entirety, see:

Arizona's Punishment Doesn't Fit the Crime: Studies Show Decrease in Arizona Crime Rates Over Time (IPC Fact Check, April 28, 2010)

###

For press inquiries contact Seth Hoy at shoy@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7509.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

A division of the American Immigration Council. Visit our website at http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/.

Implementation Costs of SB 1070 to One Arizona County

For Immediate Release
April 23. 2010

Estimates Indicate Costs Could Rise into the Hundreds of Millions of Dollars for Entire State

Washington D.C. - Today, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer may sign into law a bill that has the potential to sink her state much deeper into the red than it already is. Touting a $10 million investment into local law enforcement from discretionary federal stimulus money the state received from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Governor Brewer is gambling with Arizona's economy. The costs associated with SB 1070 have not been quantified by the Arizona legislature but it is safe to assume that $10 million dollars is only a drop in the bucket towards what it would actually cost to enforce this law.

In Arizona, when a bill is introduced in the state legislature, a "fiscal note" is attached which lays out the cost of implementation. In the case of SB 1070, the accompanying fiscal note is shockingly lacking in detail, concluding that "the fiscal impact of this bill cannot be determined with certainty. We do not have a means to quantify the number of individuals arrested under the bill's provisions or the impact on the level of illegal immigration." At a time when Arizona is facing a multi-billion dollar deficit, however, enacting an enforcement program that will surely run into the hundreds of millions of dollars is fiscally irresponsible at best.

In the absence of any current fiscal data on the cost of SB 1070's implementation, some Arizonans are pointing to a fact sheet produced by Yuma County Sheriff Ralph E. Ogden in response to similar legislation proposed in 2006. Yuma County is one of Arizona's 15 counties, with a population of about 200,000.

The 2006 fact sheet estimates the costs of a bill which would have authorized the police to arrest illegal immigrants on trespassing charges if they were simply present in the state (the bill was eventually vetoed by then Governor Janet Napolitano). The Yuma County Sherriff's fact sheet shows a staggering potential cost to Yuma County law-enforcement agencies. The Sherriff estimated:

Law-enforcement agencies would spend between $775,880 and $1,163,820 in processing expenses;

Jail costs would be between $21,195,600 and $96,086,720;

Attorney and staff fees would be $810,067-$1,620,134;

Additional detention facilities would have to be built at unknown costs.

Furthermore, in an email between Yuma County Attorney Jon Smith and Arizona lawmakers, Smith added that there would be even more costs to implementing SB 1070 than just what Ogden had outlined, and noted that his county was already struggling with a budget deficit by furloughing employees and forcing days off without pay. He wrote:

"It was also noted that the Superior Court, Justice Courts and Municipal Courts would also realize increased costs if that legislation passed. Although such increases were not calculated, it was and should be noted that such would include additional court staff, interpreters, administrative staff and pre-trial services. In a percentage of those cases, Juvenile Court and the juvenile detention facility would have also recognized cost increases...An increase of this proportion would stifle all areas of the system, from the moment of arrest to the point of conviction, sentencing and incarceration. Already LEA (law enforcement agencies) are fighting to stay afloat through the use of furloughs, and mandated days off with pay. I really doubt the fines and fees assessed will be able to match the need and cost associated."

The Yuma county snapshot of enforcement costs is a sobering reminder of the overwhelming financial harm that SB 1070 could cause the state of Arizona. Ultimately, those costs are only part of the story and don't even account for lost revenue such as tax contributions and consumer purchasing, as well as the potentially expensive lawsuits that will likely ensue if this law if it is signed by the Governor.

###

For press inquiries contact Wendy Sefsaf at wsefsaf@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7524.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

A division of the American Immigration Council. Visit our website at http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/.

How Much Will Arizona's Immigration Bill (SB1070) Cost?

For Immediate Release
April 21, 2010

Washington, D.C.- Frustrated by Congress' failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, states across the country continue considering legislation that relies heavily on punitive, enforcement-only measures which not only fail to end unauthorized immigration but also have the potential to dig their state's finances deeper into a hole. The latest example of this kind of policy nose dive is in Arizona. A recent bill, "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act" (SB 1070), was passed by the Arizona State legislature and awaits the signature of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. As the Governor ponders whether or not to put her signature on SB 1070, she should consider the potential economic impact of the bill, which would require police to check a person's immigration status if they suspect that person is in the United States illegally. This bill, if it becomes law, will likely affect not only unauthorized immigrants, but all immigrants and Latinos in general. Given the vital role that immigrants and Latinos play in Arizona's economy, and considering Arizona's current budget deficit of $3 billion dollars, enacting SB 1070 could be a perilous move.

At a purely administrative level, Gov. Brewer should take into consideration the potential costs of implementation and defending the state against lawsuits. As the National Employment Law Project (NELP) points out in the case of other states that have passed harsh local immigration laws, Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted. This is in addition to the cost of implementation. For instance, NELP observes that "in Riverside, New Jersey, the town of 8,000 had already spent $82,000 in legal fees defending its ordinance" by the time it was rescinded in September, 2007. Also in 2007, the county supervisors in Prince William County, Maryland were unwilling to move forward with the police enforcement portion of an immigration law after they found that the price tag would be a minimum of $14 million for five years.

More broadly, Gov. Brewer should keep in mind that, if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002 - the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group also estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well.

With Arizona facing a budget deficit of more than $3 billion, Gov. Brewer might want to think twice about measures such as SB 1070 that would further imperil the state's economic future and try instead to find ways in which she can bring additional tax revenue to her state while pursuing smart enforcement that will actually protect Arizonans.

###

For press inquiries contact Wendy Sefsaf at wsefsaf@immcouncil.org or 202-507-7524.

The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) is the research and policy arm of the American Immigration Council. IPC's mission is to shape a rational national conversation on immigration and immigrant integration. Through its research and analysis, IPC provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with accurate information about the role of immigrants and immigration policy on U.S. society. IPC reports and materials are widely disseminated and relied upon by press and policy makers. IPC staff regularly serves as experts to leaders on Capitol Hill, opinion-makers and the media. IPC, formed in 2003 is a non-partisan organization that neither supports nor opposes any political party or candidate for office.

A division of the American Immigration Council. Visit our website at http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/.

Are We Ready To March Seven Times?

By Fidel "Butch" Montoya

Once again the Obama Administration has shown its contempt for the Latino community and its lack of political will to fix the immigration reform problem facings our country. In an obvious show of Para-military might, President Obama allowed over 800 police and law enforcement agents of ICE and other federal law enforcement agencies to conduct a series of raids throughout Arizona.

Reports from the areas raided describe a frightening scene as federal, state, and local police moving in to arrest and detain undocumented immigrants who allegedly were involved in illegal human trafficking of undocumented immigrants in the shuttle service industry.

Kat Rodriguez of Derechos Humanos called the federal raids “a massive show of force, with helicopters, dozens of agents, police vehicles, and weapons, assaulting our community in a fashion never seen before.” A show of force whose sole intention was only to intimidate, create fear and panic.

These raids are rapidly becoming the calling card of the Obama’s Administration efforts to enforce old and antiqued immigration laws. Instead of pushing for reform, we find the President more comfortable recycling the brutal enforcement polices of the Bush Administration.

President Obama who recently claimed to support the Schumer/Graham framework for immigration reform has allowed the federal government to use all of its enforcement tactics and arsenal to continue to crack down on undocumented immigrants. In fact, this administration has a worse human rights record than that of the Bush Administration when it comes to immigration enforcement and treatment.

Senator Harry Reid’s claim last week to have 56 votes in the United States Senate to move immigration reform forward seem to ring hallow compared to the Obama’s Administration’s show of disrespect to the Latino community by allowing over 800 law enforcement agents to descend on places of employment and disrupt and destroy innocent families and personal lives.

The President who claimed to have as a national key priority the issue of immigration reform has simply allowed the Department Of Homeland Security to become the Department of Fear and Bigotry.

While our President claims to be on the side of the Latino community in fixing the immigration problem, he has allowed his Secretary of Homeland Security to become the master oppressor by allowing the largest display of federal law enforcement to suppress and intimidate our community.

Just last week in Dallas, Latino Evangelical faith leaders called upon the President to join with them in fixing the immigration problem. In a fairly soft spoken attempt at trying to rally this President to their side, the soft ball approach to the Obama Administration instead has been answered by what many are calling a complete lack of accountability by the President authorizing one of the largest raids against undocumented immigrants of his administration.

It is time to stop pretending as if this President is going to reward our community for voting for him and that we began to demand accountability of this President’s policies against creating familial separations, destroying families, and endearing itself to the evil forces of bigotry, fear, hate, and discrimination.

We need to stop counting the number of votes given to this President during the last election, and start counting anew the ones that will vote for true change and hope, not broken promises and phrases of false expectations.

While this Administration is quick to condemn the human rights violations of other third world governments, it is time that the American people understand that a government that can and will violate the rights and constitution freedoms of some will not hesitate to use that same force against others. It is time that we stood up and demanded accountability of this President and his polices of oppression.

Immigration reform leaders in Arizona are calling the massive federal raids “a new low in the Obama Administration’s lack accountability.”

We need to send the message to the President and Congressional leaders in Washington, D.C. that we are no longer going to listen to the false promises of immigration reform that come from the shallow halls of government. The half- hearted attempts to placate our efforts to find immigration reform will not be acceptable, and we must demand accountability using the mid-term elections as a means by which to register our displeasure and anger.

In Arizona where the state legislature just recently passed SB1070, a bill that essentially allows any law enforcement official who may have “a reasonable suspicion” to question anyone in the state whom they suspect may not have the proper documents to determine their immigration status is a difficult pill to swallow.

Police will have the right to stop and question anyone even if no other law has been violated. If there is “reasonable suspicion,” that you may not have the proper documentation, racial profiling will become the norm and you will be questioned.

It is under this climate of evil and anti-Latino attitudes that the President Obama ordered the largest single immigration raid in any state. President Obama has allowed governmental bureaucrats to enforce policies of the past, and has refused to implement humane and just policies that do not separate families and create fear and uncertainty in the Latino community.

He has allowed ICE to do as it pleases in enforcing its own misguided interpretation of national immigration policies to arrest, detain, and ultimately deport not hardened criminals, but men and women who support their families and whose sole attempt is to live within the framework of our United States Constitution.

It is imperative that Latino Evangelical leaders reevaluate their support of a President who refuses to acknowledge that this country must fix it immigration policies and stop violating the civil rights of Latinos.

When we allow laws that encourage racial profiling and that allow the police to stop and question any person under a racial profiling standard, we are allowing our country to slide rapidly toward the brink of becoming a police state.

A few years back, Latino Evangelical pastors refused to acknowledge that we would be facing laws that allow racial profiling, where police would be raiding homes, where Gestapo type police gangs would raid workers at their jobs, where detention facilities would be big business incarcerating and detaining undocumented immigrants without due process, and where families would be separated and destroyed by our government.

We now know that we live under a government where Gestapo type police raids are becoming the norm, where big business detention contracts are routinely approved by the government without any regard to who is being jailed, where more and more undocumented immigrants in detention are being threatened or intimidated to renounce their right to due process and as a result more immigrants are being deported, and thus allowing a government that instead of nurturing families, is out to destroy them.

The raids in Arizona only demonstrated that unless we come together and demand accountability, we will surely lose this battle against the evil forces of hate and fear.

Yet, once again last week we have found that those who claim to be our friends and allies in this fight for justice and immigration reform do not share our values or beliefs.

How then can our faith leaders pretend that the policies and governance of this President are in agreement with our vision of justice and righteousness? How can we allow this government to destroy more and more families and not raise our voice in opposition to the current policies of this government?

What will it take to create within the Latino Evangelical Church the passion to stand up for ourselves and fight for justice and righteousness?

Perhaps the best summary of the events of the Obama Raid are left to Isabel Garcia of the Tucson-based Coalicion de Derechos Humanos who said, “Instead of bringing in the Department of Justice to investigate the immigration abuses and uphold our rights, the Obama Administration sics the ICE police on our communities.”

And instead of another national gathering in Washington, D.C. to march for immigration reform again, maybe it is time we gathered together instead to demand that this President stop the raids. That he instead commit to join our fight for justice and righteousness by pursuing a policy of finding a solution to the broken immigration system that allows the fiasco that occurred in Arizona to not happen again.

Perhaps it is time that Latino Evangelical leaders take the lead of demanding Presidential accountability and stop meeting in the big house, and instead marched around the walls of the White House seven times, prepared to trumpet our demands of accountability and for righteousness judgment.

Is it time to march seven times around the walls of injustice and fear?

Fidel "Butch" Montoya is Director of H.S. Power and Light Ministries. He was the Vice President/News Director of KUSA Channel 9 News from 1985-1990, and worked at the news station for 24 years. Montoya also served as Deputy Mayor of City and County of Denver from 1995-1999; as the Manager of Public Safety for the City and County of Denver from 1994-2000. Montoya was Licensed to preach in 1972. He serves on the Executive Council for the Hispanic Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform.